Share this

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments today on Arizona’s immigration law which the Obama Administration has largely deemed unconstitutional.

Yesterday Senator Chuck Schumer held a hearing to showcase the Democrats’ opposition to the law – a position the party hopes will play well with Latino voters, who are largely against the law. Schumer vowed that if the Supreme Court upholds the Arizona statute, he will introduce a bill preventing states from enacting their own immigration enforcement laws.

Does the Supreme Court case come at a bad time for Republicans, who are also trying to woo the Latino vote? Does it give Democrats a boost for November?

Arizona’s misguided attempt at enforcing immigration policy through SB 1070 is not only unconstitutional, but has also torn at the social and moral fabric of families, communities, and America as a whole.

Rather than reaching across the aisle and supporting comprehensive immigration reform, which would render efforts such as SB 1070 unnecessary, Republicans have chosen to support a detrimental patchwork of state laws that has opened the floodgates for unjust racial profiling, tearing families apart, and burdening local law enforcement. If Republicans truly care about the economy, our national security, and the constitutional rights of all individuals, then they should join me and my Democratic colleagues in proposing concrete ideas to fix our broken immigration system in a humane and fiscally responsible way, rather than continuing to play political games during an election year.

The Arizona SB1070 controversy will not help the GOP in 2012. But SB1070 also may not help Dems who have failed to win needed immigration reforms, leaving many Latinos and other voters frustrated with partisan gridlock and both parties. Voters in 2012 could still go toward any candidate from any party who articulates a popular compromise position on immigration, and the economy will remain the number one election issue.

Although I strongly oppose ineffective SB1070 and voted against it, Dems in Washington should be careful about pushing bills that may harm states' rights, especially if nothing continues happen on Capitol Hill on immigration. Federal action against states could backfire and anger voters against Dems, especially Independents.

The American people want real, humane and fair national immigration reforms from the U.S. Government, so Congress and the White House should get stronger and more serious about passing some now.

Going to a Chuck Schumer "hearing" on SB1070 is like being "chosen" to compete in the Hunger Games. Apparently Gov. Jan Brewer knows this so she chose not to attend, whereas SB1070 co-author, Russell Pearce likes to rumble so he showed up.

I happen to know this because when Governor Brewer signed SB1070 into law I was a radio talk show host @ KTAR-FM, Phoenix. I saw the effects of out-of-control illegal immigration, I heard the empty rhetoric out of Washington D.C. from both Republican and Democratic administrations.

SB1070 does nothing more than empower local authorities to do the same things as the Feds. The only difference is that the Feds have a reputation for not enforcing immigration law and the locals, being boots on the ground are much more likely to do so.

I also found it fascinating that those community activists who claimed to care so much about fear in immigrant communities were precisely the ones who spread the fear by misrepresenting the law in the first place.

Besides gratuitously freaking out their constituents, the fear these activists so breathlessly promote is rooted in the cynical assumption that local cops are racists, and all of this tears at the fabric of our society by undermining the authority of those who are there to protect us. It is also a divisive assault on the character of the people of Arizona.

This is all about firing up the Democratic party base and to some extent it will work. Are you taking notes, Debbie Wasserman Schultz?

Republicans won't be done in by the poor timing of a Supreme Court decision; they'll be done in by an accumulation of bad policies.

Latinos, like African-Americans and women, have turned away from the Republican Party because for decades, and escalating in recent years, the GOP has pursued legislative policies that aim to marginalize these members of society. Their preference for the Democratic Party wasn't formed on a single bill or nomination, nor will the Republican deficit be undone by such.

Summarily, It's going to be difficult for Republicans to gain ground that they lost with this important constituency by merely presenting a platform that consists of Marco Rubio and a watered-down "DREAM" Act.

It is difficult to say whether the controversy over the Arizona immigration law currently before the Supreme Court will hurt the Republicans politically. The GOP’s anti-immigration stance alienates Hispanics. But it may help the party with white voters angry about illegal immigration.

The real tragedy here is not that the GOP might suffer politically, but that so many conservative Republicans have turned against immigration in the first place. Conservatives claim to support free markets, yet many of them also wish to use massive government intervention to close off an international free market in labor. They extol the virtues of self-help, economic opportunity, and individual achievement. Yet many of them also want to build a wall to keep out immigrants who come seeking greater freedom and opportunity than they could hope for in their native lands.

Had the restrictive immigration policies favored by some of today’s conservatives been in force a century ago, the ancestors of most of those conservatives would never have been able to come to America in the first place. During the first 130 years of American history, the United States had a nearly “open borders” immigration policy. Far from damaging our economy or undermining American sovereignty, that policy resulted in enormous economic advancement and helped turn the US into a global superpower.

Some conservative argue that things are different today because increased immigration could lead to an unsustainably large welfare state. However, the available evidence suggests that immigration reduces support for the welfare state rather than increases it. Survey data from both the United States and Europe suggests that increased ethnic diversity reduces public support for welfare benefits. This creates a painful dilemma for liberals who want to increase immigration but also support a large welfare state. But it’s a win-win proposition for free market advocates.

In his 1989 farewell address to the nation, Ronald Reagan said that America should be “a tall, proud city… teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace.. and … doors …. open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here.” More recently, former Florida governor Jeb Bush urged Republicans to rethink their views on immigration. Conservative Republicans should heed their call.

Politicians who are banking on using the immigration issue to move Latino voters one way or the other need to get up to speed with the facts.

As I wrote in my column Tuesday for U.S. News & World Report, the No. 1 issue for Latinos is jobs, just like it is for everyone else. As a political issue immigration is less intense than it was in 2007 and 2008, when the economy was stronger. Over the last five years the immigration tide has reversed itself - with more people leaving the country over the U.S.-Mexican border than have been coming in. There’s plenty of survey data to show that the GOP has a problem with Latinos because of the extreme rhetoric that some elements of the party have given voice to over the last few years. But there’s also data that shows Latinos are unhappy with President Obama for failing to address the issue head on and because he has failed to show leadership on his promised comprehensive immigration reform.

The most likely course moving forward is one that focuses on border security, not comprehensive reform, which is something almost everyone can get behind. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has promised to use manpower, technology and a fence to stop the flow of illegals in and out of the United States while the president has remained largely silent, even going so far as to indicate he’s going to reduce the number of U.S. personnel stationed on the border to secure it.

What Sen. Schumer and others fail to understand is that Latinos who have come to the United States legally are just as upset about illegal immigration as most of the rest of the country. They don’t like the idea that, while they played by the established rules, people who didn’t might get a free ride. It’s a doubled-edged sword that has to be wielded very carefully because it can cut both ways. Schumer and others like him have yet to realize that.

Washington will continue to fail to deal with the issue of immigration reform as long as it does, as the tenor of your question suggests, by viewing this challenge through the prism of courting Hispanic votes. This is Washington at its absolute worst - playing constituent politics - trying to pass bills to buy the loyalty of particular voting blocks rather than legislating for the benefit of all. These kind of politics divide us - and if the parties simply wage a betting war trying to buy off a particular group with special treatment then they merely accelerate the decline of American politics and further undermine their own legitimacy as legislators truly acting in the people interest.

President Obama is giving us all an object lesson in constituent politics unmatched since the days of FDR - pandering to the middle class vote, the college vote, the labor vote….bucketful of promises of what he wants to do for you…the new forgotten man is all who will have to pay the price of the pay-outs he plans to lavish on the chosen.

No issue has been more abused than immigration. The left has tried to frame this as a “right” problem…if the “right” would just be reasonable…then the problem would be solved. On the face it, we know this can’t be true. The left controlled the White House and both houses of Congress for two years and they couldn’t pass their agenda. When the right-wing controlled the West Wing it faired not better - offering many of the same proposals similar to the ones to trumpeted by this president.

The problem with using the constituent politics formula to address immigration is that immigration truly affects all of us - how we think of ourselves as a nation, how we value our sovereignty, our hopes and aspirations for our communities. Solutions that only address part of the problem or symptoms or the fallout from the problem benefit some - but hurt others. For every vote you win by promising one special interest - you lose another who sees you as selling them out.

Solving the problem starts by listening to everyone - from those who are truly concerned about the vulnerable populations trapped in the shadow land to those who feel their communities are overwhelmed with problems, to employers who need to get the employees they need when they need them to grow their business and grow even more jobs, to those think citizenship and sovereignty are more than just words. And it starts by pledging to all of them…that Washington will do the right thing….not the politically expedient one.

Then it requires doing what Washington has not done over the last decade - give equal commitment to all the tasks that need to get done to fix our flawed immigration system and broken borders. That requires being a real and enduring partner with Mexico to help them with “homegrown” solutions that improve public safety and security, combat transitional crime, strengthen their civil society, fight corruption and advance economic freedom. It means doing effective and responsible border security as well as investing in border infrastructure so we can move people, goods, and services efficiently and securely. It means being a partner with, not adversary of the states - paying as much attention to federalism as federal preemption. It means enforcing workplace and immigration laws (the broken windows theory works). It means piloting and implementing effective temporary worker programs that get employers the employees they need when they need them to grow the economy. It means reforming and modernizing the legal immigrations system in a deliberate and systematic manner so it better serves the nation. In short, it means fixing the system. This does not require a massive mother-of-all bill. What it requires is a government willing to dedicate years to fixing a problem largely created by decades of neglect.

And it all starts that saying to ourselves this is NOT an immigration issue - America is and should remain an immigrant nation - the is a issue is that our political class has failed to exert real leadership - and has execrated the problem by devolving into chasing votes.

The GOP has substituted the "Southern Strategy" with what I call a "South West Strategy". It's not a question of if but when it will destroy them. Recent polls showing POTUS in a dead heat w/ Romney in Arizona should be evidence of how their papers please race baiting bills are hurting more than not.

The GOP is a one-trick party. All of their policies and message can be defined by one word. Fear.

Fear President Obama, fear terrorism, fear the poor, fear debt and now fear your Latino neighbor. Americans don't fear easy these days and this tactic has gone cold. If Republicans hope to continue as a national party they better change course on immigration and fast.

Between Romney, House Republicans, and the Supreme Court, I am not sure who is doing more to mobilize Obama’s base.

In a short period of time, these leaders may legalize intrusive police questioning of Latinos, double loan payments for college students, allow insurance companies to bar health coverage based on pre-existing conditions, and upset women with a range of policy actions. The Court and GOP leaders are helping Obama bring together the women, Latinos, and young people he needs to win reelection.

National Republicans are experiencing the fate of their party in California. High-profile anti-Hispanic and anti-immigrant rhetoric and activities are undermining their ability to win elections in an increasing number of constituencies.

Mitt Romney will not be able to Etch-a-Sketch his way to erase his primary campaign statements and associations. Every reminder of the Republican Party's position on immigrants - including this Supreme Court case - helps Democrats and hurts Republicans.

Dewey ClaytonProfessor of Political Science, University of Louisville :

The controversy surrounding Arizona's new immigration law SB 1070 is largely one of federalism.

Immigration laws and the enforcement of those laws has largely been the purview of the United States government. According to Article Vi of the U.S. Constitution, when a state law is in conflict with a national law, the national law is supreme (the Supremacy Clause). The founding fathers set up the Constitution that way.

Aside from the substantive issue, from a procedural point of view, the state of Arizona is trying to usurp federal jurisdiction which sets a poor legal precedent. I think that the state of Arizona is within its rights to complain about the lack of federal enforcement. However, the way one solves this dilemma is to insist that the federal government enforce its laws or pass laws that will address the current problems.

It should boost the support for Democrats if people voted on the issues. But people often vote on the question of whether and who they can trust and who seems to understand them and what they have been going through. Democrats often misunderstand that last question by imagining that it refers only to people's economic well-being and not their psychological or spiritual well-being, so they might have been more vulnerable on that front had the Republicans chosen someone who understood that dimension. But if Romney sticks to a "it's the economy, stupid" philosophy he may not appear to understand people any better than Obama, in which case issues like immigration may have greater impact.

When it comes to immigration reform, Bush is right. Yes, former President George W. Bush is right: “family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River. Latinos enrich our country with faith in God, a strong ethic of work, community & responsibility. Immigration is not a problem to be solved, it is the sign of a successful nation. New Americans are to be welcomed as neighbors and not to be feared as strangers."

But Bush lost that fight within his own party when John McCain walked away from his own McCain-Kennedy comprehensive reform bill to secure borders and offer paths to citizenship for those willing to work hard learn English and be of good behavior.

Sadly, Mitt Romney is clearly seeing immigration as a “problem” and immigrants as people to be “feared as strangers” - and his proposing self-deportation, calling SB 1070 “a model,” opposing the Violence Against Women Act protections for illegal immigrants, and pushing voter ID laws will lose an election and a generation.

Voter ID laws in particular are driving the Republican Party this year, and Mitt Romney supporting them with Marco Rubio in tow will not help either man win over Latino voters and will backfire in 2012 as people remember which party wanted them to vote and which one didn’t. We saw this movie before in 2010 when Latino-sponsored voter suppression efforts failed.

As I wrote about in Campaign Boot Camp 2.0, the GOP-backed Latinos for Reform ran despicable ads urging Latino voters not to vote in 2010. Galvanized by longtime civil rights activists like Dolores Huerta, who called it a “deceptive trap of no representation” and new media networks like Voto Latino, Latino voters did vote, and a majority gave their votes - and thus the Senate Majority - to pro-immigrant Democrats Harry Reid in Nevada, Barbara Boxer in California, and Michael Bennet in Colorado.

While this anti-immigrant immigration helps me as a Democrat it hurts me as an American - so for the good of the country Romney should humanize his stance on immigration and stop dividing people on the basis of race or immigration status. The Romney campaign says the Republican Platform will be “like Bush, but updated” - well, immigration policy is one area where they should actually be like Bush because Bush is right with his more unifying approach.

A very recent news report stated more people are leaving the U.S. to return to Mexico than are coming to the U.S. from Mexico illegally. Several factors have led to this trend. Assuming the report is true, many voters will see this as positive news. The GOP’s position on immigration has been criticized by many, and yes, it will hurt them with Latino voters in the next election. The Arizona case comes at a good time for Democrats, and it will help the president in November.

More POLITICO Arena

About the Arena

The Arena is a cross-party, cross-discipline forum for intelligent and lively conversation about political and policy issues. Contributors have been selected by POLITICO staff and editors. David Mark, Arena's moderator, is a Senior Editor at POLITICO. Each morning, POLITICO sends a question based on that day's news to all contributors.